Study of Influence of Operating Parameters
on Braking Friction and Rolling Resistance
Santosh K. Srirangam, Kumar Anupam, Cor Kasbergen,
Athanasios Scarpas, and Veronique Cerezo
Tireroad interaction addresses safety with respect to braking friction
and energy efficiency in the context of rolling resistance. These phe
nomena are coherent, but their engineering solutions can be contra
dictory. For example, highly skid-resistant surfaces may not be ideal for
fuel economy, but surfaces with low rolling resistance may be prone to
skidding. Several experimental and numerical studies have investigated
the individual phenomena, but insufficient attention has been paid to
studying them coherently. The present study computed braking fric
tion and rolling resistance for various operating parameters and their
coherent response for each parameter with the use of a thermomechani
cal contact algorithm. Micromechanical finite element simulations of
a rolling or braking pneumatic tire against selected asphalt concrete
surfaces were performed for various operating conditions, such as tire
load, inflation pressure, speed, and ambient air and pavement tempera
tures. The coefficients of braking friction and rolling resistance were
found to decrease with the inflation pressure and the temperature and to
increase with the wheel load. The braking friction coefficient was found
to decrease with the speed, in contrast to the rolling resistance coefficient,
which increases with the same parameter. A full-skidding tire registered
lower braking friction than a 20% slipping tire. Also, an asphalt surface
with higher macrotexture offered higher braking friction and higher
rolling resistance, and vice versa.
Safety and energy efficiency are two important aspects of the world
road transport system. Tirepavement interaction addresses safety
in the context of braking friction and energy efficiency in the con-
text of rolling resistance. However, these phenomena are coherent,
and their engineering solutions can sometimes be contradictory.
For example, asphalt surfaces with high braking friction may not
be optimal for vehicle fuel economy, and surfaces with low rolling
resistant may be prone to skidding. The hysteretic or bulk internal
friction of a tire predominantly accounts for the resistance against
skidding that occurs when road macrotexture causes considerable
deformation of tire rubber. Rolling resistance occurs because of non-
symmetric deformations of the base of a wheel in motion. A counter
moment is generated because of the resulting misalignment between
the wheel load (acting at the axle) and the wheel base reaction force.
S.K. Srirangam, K. Anupam, C. Kasbergen, and A. Scarpas, Section of Road Engi-
neering, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Delft University of Technol-
ogy, Stevinweg 1, 2628 CN, Delft, Netherlands. V. Cerezo, L'Universit Nantes
Angers Le Mans, Institut Francais des Sciences et Technologies des Transports,
de l'Amnagement et des Rseaux, Route de Bouaye, CS4, 44344 Bouguenais
CEDEX, France. Corresponding author: S.K. Srirangam, S.K.Srirangam@tudelft.nl.
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board,
No. 2525, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2015, pp. 7990.
DOI: 10.3141/2525-09
79
A detailed literature review of the effect of various tire- and
pavement-related factors on braking friction was discussed earlier
works (1, 2). This paper gives an overview of research studies into
the rolling resistance of tires. The first systematic approach to the
problem of rolling resistance was undertaken in 1785 by Coulomb,
who assumed that the resistance to rolling arises from surface asperi-
ties (3). Reynolds in 1886 showed that along with surface asperities,
interfacial slip caused by deformations of wheel and roadway play
an important role in deriving rolling resistance (4, p. 74). Clark and
Schuring (5) and Schuring and Futamura (6) conducted experimental
and mathematical investigations to find the effects of load, speed, and
inflation pressure on rolling loss in automobile tires. They found that
rolling resistance increases with an increase in load and speed and
decreases with inflation pressure. Descornet experimentally found that
surface texture and tire temperature can affect rolling resistance by
46% and fuel consumption by 9% (ASTM STP 1031). Ullidtz et al.
found in their experimental program that a 0.5-mm increase in mean
profile depth results in a 10% increase in rolling resistance (7).
Tielking and Schapery performed an analytical study to compute
the influence of tire design parameters (geometry and materials) on
tire power and its relationship to tire rolling resistance (8). One of
the earliest numerical studies on the rolling resistance of a tire was
performed by Browne et al. (9). Later researchers solved the rolling
resistance of an automobile tire in steady state analysis by consider-
ing the viscoelastic material properties (1012). Sarkar et al. (13) and
Luchini et al. (14) adopted an efficient one-way coupled method to
solve rolling loss of a pneumatic tire in which structural and energy
loss calculations were done in separate steps. Such a method reduced
the computational time significantly. Ebbott et al. (15), Wei et al.
(16), and Shida et al. (17) adopted the same methodology to develop
a coupled thermomechanical model for computing rolling resistance
of tires in the finite element (FE) framework. In their numerical
investigations, they observed that rolling resistance increases with
load and decreases with inflation pressure and temperature.
The literature survey shows that previous experimental and numer-
ical studies investigated the phenomena of rolling resistance and
braking friction individually, but insufficient attention has been paid
to their mutual correspondence. In this study, a framework com-
prising a state-of-the-art tirepavement interaction model equipped
with a thermomechanical contact algorithm and material constitutive
models was used for simulation of all major physical processes con-
tributing to braking friction and rolling resistance in the interfacial
zone between the pavement surface and the tire. Within this micro-
mechanical framework, simulations of a pneumatic tire traversing
surfaces of various asphalt mix design at various tire operating con-
ditions were performed; braking friction and rolling resistance were
included as design objectives. The FE model was duly validated
80
with field experimental tests pertaining to braking friction and rolling
resistance.
Objective and Scope
In this paper, a unified thermomechanical framework is used for
concurrent simulation and relative quantification of the influence of
various operating parameters on braking friction and rolling resis-
tance. The paper analyzes the influence of tire and pavement oper-
ating conditions on the mutual correspondence of braking friction
and rolling resistance. The following parameters are considered and
vary over a wide range:
Tire load, inflation pressure, and speed;
Ambient and pavement temperatures; and
Asphalt surface macrotextures.
In the study, it is assumed that the computed rolling resistance is
caused by the energy losses of tire only, and the losses related to,
for example, air drag are neglected. It is also assumed that the com-
puted braking friction is related to the hysteretic part of the friction,
and the adhesion part is neglected.
Study Parameters
This research involves a parametric study of various factors asso
ciated with the rolling resistance and the braking friction of a pneu-
matic tire traversing with prescribed operating conditions on various
(b)
Micromechanical asphalt
pavement mesh
(c)
FIGURE 1(a) Computed tomography two-dimensional scans, (b) 3-D FE asphalt concrete
mesh, and (c) FE model of tireasphalt surface interaction (3-D = three-dimensional).
Transportation Research Record 2525
asphalt pavement surfaces. A Permanent International Association
of Road CongressesWorld Road Association (PIARC) 165R15
tire with operating tire loads of 3,000 to 4,000 N, tire inflation pres-
sures of 150 to 250 kPa, vehicle speeds of 40 to 180 km/h, and slip
ratios of 20% and 100% was considered in the simulations (18).
The laboratory experimental procedure to obtain the tire stiffness
and the tire rubber material properties were discussed in previous
studies (19). Four asphalt pavement surfacesporous asphalt (PA),
ultrathin surface (UTS), sand asphalt (SA), and dense asphalt con-
crete (DAC-10)were considered. The pavement microtexture is
neglected: only the macrotexture affects are considered in this study.
The ambient air and pavement surface temperatures varied from
10C to 50C.
Description of FE Model
Previous work discussed the development of an FE three-dimensional
(3-D) thermomechanical tireroad interaction model and the proce-
dure for obtaining braking friction forces (1, 2, 19). For the present
study, the FE model was further upgraded to compute the rolling
resistance of a passenger car tire traversing various asphalt pavement
surfaces. The numerical modeling of the tirepavement surface
interaction was done with the FE package ABAQUS (20).
The FE meshes of various asphalts pavements were obtained by
following a procedure that starts with scanning of asphalt pavement
core samples with X-ray computed tomography (CT) to obtain the
internal structure of asphalt specimens (Figure 1a). In the CT scans,
the three phases of asphalt concrete, that is, aggregates, mastic, and
air voids, can be distinguished. Since the intensity of each pixel is
(a)
3-D pneumatic
tire model
z
Fz y
x
Fx
Srirangam, Anupam, Kasbergen, Scarpas, and Cerezo 81

proportional to object density, air voids with the lowest density are The viscous LagrangeGreen strain in the reference configuration
black, while the aggregates and mastic vary from dark to light gray is a function of the viscous right CauchyGreen deformation tensor
depending on their relative densities. Then, the specialized 3-D-based Cv = FTvFv:
image processing software Simpleware was used to assemble the
pixel-based 2-D scans into 3-D voxel-based meshes (ScanIP 32-bit, 1
Version 4.3; +CAD 32-bit, Version 1.3). A reduction algorithm was Ev = (Cv I ) (2)
2
then used to transform these meshes into FE meshes that were then
used for simulations of tirepavement interaction (Figure 1b). The
procedure for obtaining the FE mesh of a given asphalt pavement where I is the second-order identity tensor.
surface was described in previous work (19). Consequently the viscous LagrangeGreen strain rate in the
An in-house FORTRAN program was developed for computing reference configuration is defined as
the energy dissipation caused by rolling tirepavement interaction.
The overall framework can be divided into the following steps: 1
E v = C v = F vT d v Fv (3)
2
1. The micromechanical rollingskidding modeling of a tire on
an FE asphalt surface was developed in two stages. In the first stage, where dv is the viscous rate of deformation tensor.
a static 3-D model of the tire rolling over a smooth pavement was The tensor dv is a function of the spatial velocity gradient Lv:
developed. In this stage, tire footprint, rolling radius, and 3-D rolling
tire deformation analyses were carried out.
1 T
2. In the second stage of development, the history of stresses, dv = ( L v + L v ) = L v = Cv1 : e (4)
strains, and displacements retained from the first stage were imported. 2
In the analysis, the FE test tire was forced to roll or slip at a desired
speed on an FE mesh of an asphalt pavement surface, as shown in where Cv is a double symmetric fourth-order tensor representing
Figure 1c. This two-stage procedure drastically improves the com- the viscosity and e = Ce Se is the Mandel stress tensor and Se is the
putational time. The generalized viscoelastic material model was second PiolaKirchhoff tensor in the intermediate configuration.
used to characterize the tire rubber in the form of Pronys coefficients. Because the term C v1: e is symmetric, the spatial velocity gradient
The output (stresses and strains) of the deformation analysis was Lv becomes symmetric also, and therefore Lv = dv.
transferred to the next stage of analysis. The rate of viscous work, which always has to be positive, can now
3. The stresses and strains obtained from the deformation module be expressed as
were used to compute the energy dissipation in a separate module
called the dissipation module, and this methodology is based on W v = S : E v = ( F v1Se F v T ) : F vT d Fv
the multiplicative decomposition concept shown in Figure 2.
4. The total deformation of a Maxwell component can be split = F v1Se : F vT d v Fv F v1 = Se : F v1Fv d v
into its elastic and viscous parts. Equations 1 through 10 show the
procedure for deriving the rolling resistance force. = Se : d v = Se : L v (5)

F = Fe Fv (1) The viscous work itself can be calculated with the following
incremental formula:
where F, Fe, and Fv are the total, elastic, and viscous deformation
gradients, respectively. Wv = tWv + ( Se : Lv ) i t
t + t 0
Wv = 0 (6)

EE

E1 Fv
E1 11

dxpv
dx Fe
E2 dX
dx
E2 22

EN F dx
En Nn

(b)
(a)

FIGURE 2(a) One-dimensional schematic diagram of viscoelastic material model

and (b) multiplicative decomposition of deformation gradient.
82
The energy loss WV per unit volume per cycle can be written as
T The gravity force is neglected because the test track is flat.
Wv = Se : L v dt (7)
0
where T is the time elapsed for one revolution.
Because the 3-D tire model is built up from sections, the energy
loss is reformulated as
M K T
Wv = S ekm : L km
v dt (8)
m =1 k =1 0
where k = 1, 2,...,K is the number of the sections in the 3-D tire
model and m = 1, 2,...,M is the number of elements in each section
of the 3-D tire model.
Then the rolling resistance (RR) of a given tire is computed by
WV
RR = (9)
2 re
where re is the effective rolling radius of the tire.
Field Test
A detailed description on the field braking friction tests was presented
in previous work (2). In this section, the field experimental testing pro-
gram on rolling resistance is described. The rolling resistance tests
were performed with a passenger car, a Renault Clio 3, equipped
with several sensors that measure both kinematic behavior of the
vehicle (position, speed in longitudinal and lateral directions, accel-
erations in the three directions, rotational speed of each wheel, etc.)
and dynamic performance (forces and torques in three directions)
on the wheel.
The following parameters were investigated in field wet friction
hydroplaning tests:
Pavement surface texture: DAC-10 surface, UTS, SA concrete
(SA 0/4) surface;
Tire type: 185/60 R15 Michelin Energy Saver tire;
Slip ratio: 0%;
Velocity: 40, 60, and 90 km/h; and
Tire inflation pressure and load: 220 kPa and 4.0 kN.
All field experiments were conducted on the Institut Francais des
Sciences et Technologies des Transports, de l'Amnagement et des
Rseaux (IFSTTAR) test tracks. Figure 3a shows the test vehicle,
with the necessary components, that was used in the field investiga-
tion of rolling resistance. The test passenger car was equipped with
a dynamometric wheel to measure the force and the torque in three
coordinate directions of the test wheel. The wheel was equipped with
a CORREVIT sensor and a numerical wheel encoder to measure the
longitudinal speed and the wheel speed of the test vehicle, respectively.
The vehicle was also equipped with an inertial system to measure the
acceleration and the angular speeds of the wheel. Data acquisition was
done at a frequency of 100 Hz. The vehicle traveled at a constant speed
under full rolling condition during each test in a straight line.
The following assumptions were made during the calculation of
the rolling resistance force Frr from the field data:
Transportation Research Record 2525
The inertial forces are neglected because a constant speed is
maintained (no acceleration, no deceleration) during the measurement.
The calculation of rolling resistance from field data is as follows.
The forces (Fx, Fy, Fz) and the torques values (Mx, My, Mz) obtained
from the field tests are inclusive of the drag force (Fdrag); thus
Fx = Frr + Fdrag (10)
from which the value of Fdrag has to be deducted.
The value of Fdrag can be calculated as
1
Fdrag = sx cx v 2 (11)
2
where sx = 2.2 m2 is the surface area considered for the drag effort
and cx = 0.25 is the constant.
From which the coefficient of rolling resistance (Crr) can be
calculated as
Frr
Crr = (12)
Fz
Validation
The validation of the computed results of braking friction coefficients
(brake) from the FE model against field experimental data of braking
friction on various asphalt surfaces was shown in an earlier study
(2). An example of validation is shown in Figure 4, a, b, and c, in
which computer simulation results of braking friction coefficients
of a PIARC smooth tire sliding on PA, DAC-10, and SA surfaces are
plotted against the experimental data of braking friction obtained
from field tests conducted on the IFSTTAR test tracks. In addition,
further validation was performed for the rolling resistance coefficients,
computed with the same FE model, against field rolling resistance
measurements under identical test conditions:
1. Passenger car tire rolling at 0% slip ratio on a DAC-10 surface,
2. Passenger car tire rolling at 0% slip ratio on a UTS surface, and
3. Passenger car tire rolling at 0% slip ratio on a SA surface.
For rolling resistance tests, speeds ranging from 40 to 140 km/h
were adopted. The tire was tested at an inflation pressure of 150 kPa
and a tire load of 4.0 kN. On the basis of these variables, a total of
seven scenarios were analyzed to validate rolling resistance coeffi-
cients (Crr) obtained by the FE model against the field measurements
as shown in Figure 4, d, e, and f. For all cases tested, comparison of
the measured and predicted results shows a very good agreement,
considering the unavoidable variations of field conditions and pos-
sible measurement errors. Closer examination of the experimental
and the model predicted results showed the following:
1. The braking friction coefficient decreases with speed for PA,
DAC-10, and SA pavement surfaces.
2. The rolling resistance coefficient marginally varies for the
considered speed range for UTS, DAC-10, and SA pavement surfaces.
Both trends are in agreement with previous experimental studies.
Srirangam, Anupam, Kasbergen, Scarpas, and Cerezo 83

Dynamometric wheel CORREVIT sensor

Numerical wheel encoder Inertial system

(a)

(b)

FIGURE 3 Field rolling resistance test: (a) test wheel setup and (b) rolling resistance measurements by test vehicle.
84 Transportation Research Record 2525

0.8 0.8
Exp FE Exp FE

0.6 0.6

brake

brake
0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0
40 60 90 40 60 80 90
Speed (km/h) Speed (km/h)
(a) (b)

0.8
Exp FE
0.045
FE simulation
0.6
0.042 Experimental
brake

0.4 0.039

Crr
0.036
0.2
0.033

0.0 0.030
40 60 20 60 100 140
Speed (km/h) Speed (km/h)
(c) (d)

0.045 0.030
FE simulation
0.042 Experimental 0.028

0.039 0.026
Crr

Crr

0.036 0.024

0.033 0.022 FE simulation

Experimental
0.030 0.020
20 60 100 140 20 60 100 140
Speed (km/h) Speed (km/h)
(e) (f)

FIGURE 4 Experimental results versus model predicted results. For 2,500-N tire load, 200-kPa
inflation pressure, 100% slip ratio, and PIARC smooth tire: (a) PA surface, (b) DAC-10 surface, and
(c) SA surface. For 4,000-N load, 150-kPa pressure, and Michelin tire: (d) UTS surface, (e) DAC-10
surface, and (f) SA surface.

Results and Discussion Influence of Tire Inflation Pressure on

This section presents the computed coefficients of braking and Crr,
for various asphalt surface and tire operating conditions. Figure 5
plots coefficients of braking friction and rolling resistance as a
function of tire inflation pressure. Similarly, Figures 6, 7, and 8
plot braking friction and rolling resistance coefficients as a func-
tion of tire load, speed, and ambient and pavement temperatures,
respectively. Figure 9 shows the effect of asphalt pavement sur-
face morphology on both braking friction and rolling resistance.
The findings and significance of the results are discussed in the
following subsections.
Braking Friction and Rolling Resistance
For evaluation of the relative interaction of braking friction and rolling
resistance against inflation pressure, 150 to 250 kPa were considered.
For this pressure range, the FE simulations were performed for a
PIARC smooth tire with a constant load of 4 kN, traversing an SA
pavement surface mesh at a speed of 80 km/h. The braking friction
values were computed at slip ratios of 20% and 100%. These two slip
ratios represent the scenarios of near antilock braking system (ABS)
and locked-wheel braking friction. Rolling resistance values were
computed for a fully rolling tire.
Srirangam, Anupam, Kasbergen, Scarpas, and Cerezo 85

1.0 0.02

0.9
0.019
0.8

0.7
0.018
0.6
braking, 20%
braking

Crr
0.5 0.017

0.4
0.016
0.3 braking, 100%

0.2
0.015
0.1
Crr
0.0 0.014
150 170 190 210 230 250
Inflation Pressure (kPa)

FIGURE 5 Schematic of influence of inflation pressure on braking friction and

rolling resistance: load, 4,000 N; pressure, 150 to 250 kPa; speed, 80 km/h;
PIARC smooth tire; ambient temperature, 158C; pavement temperature, 158C;
and SA pavement surface.

100 0.021

Frr
95
Crr

90

0.020
85
Frr (N)

Crr

80

75
0.019

70

65

60 0.018
3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000
Tire load (N)
(a)

FIGURE 6 Schematic of influence of wheel load on braking friction and rolling

resistance: (a) 3,000- to 4,000-N load, 150-kPa pressure, 40-km/h speed,
PIARC smooth tire, 158C ambient temperature, 158C pavement temperature,
and SA pavement surface.
(continued on next page)
86 Transportation Research Record 2525

1.0 100

0.9 Frr 95
0.8
90
0.7
85
0.6
braking, 20%
braking

Frr (N)
0.5 80

0.4
75
0.0 braking, 100%
70
0.2
65
0.1

0.0 60
3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000
Tire load (N)
(b)

FIGURE 6 (continued) Schematic of influence of wheel load on braking

friction and rolling resistance: (b) 3,000- to 4,000-N load, 150-kPa
pressure, 40-km/h speed, PIARC smooth tire, 158C ambient temperature,
158C pavement temperature, and SA pavement surface.

0.8 0.04

0.7
0.035

0.6 braking, 20%

0.03
0.5
Crr
braking

0.4 0.025
Crr

braking, 100%

0.3
0.02

0.2

0.015
0.1

0 0.01
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Speed (km/h)

FIGURE 7 Schematic of influence of speed on braking friction and rolling

resistance: load, 4,000 N; pressure, 150 kPa; speed, 40 to 80 km/h;
PIARC smooth tire; ambient temperature, 158C; pavement temperature, 158C;
and SA pavement surface.
Srirangam, Anupam, Kasbergen, Scarpas, and Cerezo 87

1.0 0.021

0.9 0.02

0.8
0.019

0.7
braking, 20% 0.018
0.6
0.017
braking

Crr
0.5 braking, 100%
0.016
0.4

Crr 0.015
0.3

0.014
0.2

0.1 0.013

0.0 0.012
10 20 30 40 50
Ambient Temperature (C)
(a)

1.0 0.028

0.9
0.026

0.8
0.024
0.7

0.022
0.6
braking, 20%
braking

Crr

0.5 0.02

0.4
0.018

0.3 braking, 100%

0.016
0.2 Crr

0.014
0.1

0.0 0.012
10 20 30 40 50
Ambient Temperature (C)
(b)

FIGURE 8 Schematic of influence of temperature on braking friction and

rolling resistance: (a) 4,000-N load, 150-kPa pressure, 40-km/h speed, PIARC
smooth tire, SA surface, and 508C pavement temperature, and (b) 4,000-N load,
150-kPa pressure, 40-km/h speed, PIARC smooth tire, SA surface, and 408C
pavement temperature.
88 Transportation Research Record 2525

1.0 20%50 km/h The percentage decrease in the predicted values of rolling resis-
20%80 km/h tance was 27% for the same change in the inflation pressure, which
20%120 km/h means, within the given pressure range, that when the tire is rolling
100%50 km/h at near ABS slip ratios (20%), the effect of inflation pressure on
0.8
100%80 km/h braking friction can practically be neglected. The increase in tire
100%120 km/h inflation pressure results in a noticeable drop in the horizontal force
experienced by the tire, when it is traversing at two extreme slipping
0.6 conditions, that is, full rolling and fully locked wheel on the same
pavement surface.
braking

0.4 Influence of Wheel Load on Braking Friction

and Rolling Resistance

In this section, the effect of tire load on the braking friction and the
0.2 rolling resistance is presented. For a common basis for comparison,
an SA pavement surface, a constant inflation pressure of 150 kPa,
a speed of 40 km/h, and an ambient temperature of 40C were con-
0.0 sidered. An operating load range of 3,000 to 4,000 N was considered.
PA UTS DAC-10 SA As shown in Figure 6a, the rolling resistance is presented in the form
Pavement Surface of Frr and Crr. Crr can be expressed as the ratio of Frr and the cor-
(a) responding tire load at which Frr is computed. Figure 6a shows that
the nature of Frr and Crr are opposite to each other. However, Frr is
0.05 a more rational representative of rolling resistance than Crr under
50 km/h
variable loading conditions.
Figure 6b shows the influence of wheel loading conditions on
80 km/h
braking friction and rolling resistance. As the tire load increases,
0.04 120 km/h both braking friction and rolling friction increased. This result can
be attributed to the increase in energy losses caused by increasing
tire load, which ultimately caused an increase in the computed
braking friction coefficient and rolling resistance force. For exam-
0.03
ple, the increase in the computed braking friction coefficients was
observed to be 11% and 18% for the slip ratios of 20% and 100% slip
Crr

ratios, respectively, for a change of load from 3,000 to 5,000 N.

0.02
0.01
0
UTS SA DAC-10 PA
Pavement Surface
(b)
FIGURE 9 Schematic of influence of asphalt mix design for
4,000-N load, 150-kPa pressure, PIARC smooth tire, 158C ambient
temperature, and 158C pavement temperature: (a) braking friction
and (b) rolling resistance.
The plot in Figure 5 shows that both braking and Crr decrease with tire
inflation pressure. This effect is attributed to the reduction in expended
energy of the tire caused by an increase in the tire inflation pressure,
which causes the reduction of both locked-wheel braking friction and
rolling resistance coefficients. The effect of tire inflation pressure on
braking friction is more pronounced for a locked wheel than for a slip-
ping wheel. For example, the percentage decrease in braking was observed
to be 6.5% and 25% for slip ratios of 20% and 100%, respectively,
when the tire inflation pressure changed from 150 to 250 kPa.
This trend suggests that changeable loading conditions have a
slightly greater effect on the braking friction of a locked wheel
than a 20% slipping wheel. The percentage increase in the pre-
dicted values of rolling resistance force was 35% under the same
loading and pavement surface conditions, indicating that the effect
of tire load has more influence on rolling resistance than the braking
friction.
Influence of Speed on Braking Friction
and Rolling Resistance
In this subsection, the effect of speed on braking friction and rolling
resistance is presented at a constant load of 4,000 N and a constant
inflation pressure of 150 kPa, and the computed results are shown in
Figure 7. Results show that the values of the coefficients of braking
friction decrease profoundly with speed for slip ratios of 20% and
100%. For example, for an SA pavement surface, an increase of
speed from 40 to 180 km/h decreases the value of braking friction
coefficients by 0.46 and 0.4 for 20% and 100% slip ratios, respec-
tively. About 64% and 73% decrease in computed braking friction
is observed for slip ratios of 20% and 100%, respectively, by an
increase in speed by 140 km/h. This result can be attributed to the
temperature increase in the tire with speed under slipping conditions,
which results in lower energy dissipation, ultimately causing the
value of braking to decrease.
Srirangam, Anupam, Kasbergen, Scarpas, and Cerezo
The value of rolling resistance increases marginally, about 3%,
until 80 km/h. Only a marginal change in the energy loss was observed
until that speed. Then, it increased noticeably for the rest of the
speed range. Overall, about a 33% increase in rolling resistance was
observed for the change in speed by 140 km/h. This result can be
attributed to the increase in the dissipation energy with speed under
full rolling conditions, which results in higher rolling resistance.
Influence of Ambient and Pavement Temperatures
on Braking Friction and Rolling Resistance
This subsection discusses the effect of ambient and pavement tem-
peratures on the computed braking friction and rolling resistance
coefficients; the results are shown in Figure 8. The results show
that at constant load, inflation pressure, and speed, the values of
braking and Crr decrease with an increase in both ambient and pave-
ment temperatures. For example, as shown in Figure 8a, for an SA
pavement surface, the predicted braking drops from 0.73 to 0.65 for
20% slip ratio and 0.58 to 0.5 for 100% slip ratio for an increase
of ambient temperature from 10C to 50C. A decrease of braking
friction of about 11% and 14% is observed for slip ratios of 20%
and 100%, respectively, for an increase in ambient temperature
of 40C. Similarly, the predicted braking drops from 0.63 to 0.53
for 20% slip ratio and 0.42 to 0.32 for 100% slip ratio for increase
of pavement temperature from 10C to 50C (Figure 8b). A decrease of
braking friction of about 23% and 16% is observed for slip ratios of 20%
and 100%, respectively, for an increase in pavement temperature
of 40C.
A similar trend was observed for the Crr which drops from 0.02 to
0.015 with an increase in the ambient temperature of 40C (Figure 8a).
About a 25% decrease in the value of the Crr was observed for the
same increase in the ambient temperature. Similarly, the predicted
Crr drop from 0.026 to 0.016 with an increase in the pavement tem-
perature of 40C (Figure 8b). About a 37% decrease in the value
of the Crr was observed for the same increase in the pavement tem-
perature. Higher ambient and pavement temperatures increased the
overall tire temperature, which lowered the material modulus prop-
erties, because of which the computed energy dissipation decreased.
This decrease in energy dissipation resulted in lower braking friction
coefficient and rolling resistance.
Rolling resistance is more sensitive than braking friction to the
effect of ambient and pavement temperatures. Although the braking
friction values with ambient and pavement temperatures are differ-
ent at different slip ratios, the rate of drop is almost constant. Thus,
it can be inferred that the variation in the braking with ambient and
pavement temperatures is independent of the slip ratio.
Influence of Asphalt Mix Design on Braking Friction
and Rolling Resistance
This subsection discusses the effect of asphalt mix design on the com-
puted braking friction and Crr (Figure 9). From the computed results
of braking friction and rolling resistance for four asphalt pavement
surfaces, the following ranking is given in the increasing order of
skidding risk: PA surface with the least risk, followed by the UTS, the
DAC-10 surface, and then the SA surface, which has relatively the
highest risk. These differences are shown in the bar chart in Figure
9a for six sets (three speeds two slip ratios) of the computed braking
for 20% and 100% slip ratios at speeds of 50, 80, and 120 km/h.
89
The ranking in increasing rolling resistance follows the same trend,
that is, the PA surface offers the highest rolling resistance, followed by
UTS, DAC-10, and SA, which has a relatively lower rolling resistance
for the same tire loading conditions as shown in Figure 9b.
These results can be attributed to the increase in the energy
dissipation of tire rubber with improved macrotexture that has
an identical effect on both braking and Crr. Therefore, the overall
effectiveness of an asphalt pavement mix design would have to
be assessed against both friction and free rolling resistance. For
instance, SA, a surface with relatively smooth macrotexture, would
offer lower rolling resistance properties than a surface with a PA mix
design. However, this notion would be reversed if one better brak-
ing friction were considered. That is, it is a challenge for highway
agencies to decide which mix design to consider for roads with
heavy traffic because the road surface must satisfy both safety and
fuel economy, which are in contrast to each other.
Conclusions
This paper presented an FE framework for computing braking fric-
tion and rolling resistance for various operating parameters and their
coherent response for each parameter. A 3-D FE thermomechanical
tirepavement interaction model was used. Four asphalt pavement
surfaces were studied: PA, UTS, SA, and DAC-10. Two slip ratios of
20% and 100%, which represent ABS and locked-wheel conditions,
were analyzed for braking friction simulations. The full rolling condi-
tion of a tire was simulated for the rolling resistance analysis. For each
pavement surface texture and tire slip ratio, the FE simulations of brak-
ing friction and rolling resistance were performed at various inflation
pressures (150 to 350 kPa), loads (3,000 to 5,000 N), speeds (40 to
180 km/h), and ambient and pavement temperatures (10C to 50C).
Braking friction and rolling resistance coefficients were found
to decrease with inflation pressure and increase as the wheel load
increased. The braking friction coefficient was found to decrease with
the speed, in contrast to the rolling resistance, which increased with
speed. Both ambient and pavement temperatures resulted in the dimin-
ishing trend of braking friction and rolling resistance coefficients. It
was observed that a fully skidding tire registers a lower braking friction
coefficient than a 20% slipping tire. Of the four analyzed pavement
surfaces, PA offers the highest braking, followed by UTS, DAC-10, and
SA. This trend is reversed for the rolling resistance: SA offers the least
rolling resistance, followed by DAC-10, UTS, and PA surfaces. All
these results depend on the energy dissipation phenomenon, which is
the key to analyzing both braking friction and rolling resistance under
variable tire, pavement, and environmental conditions.
References
1. Anupam, K., S.K. Srirangam, A. Scarpas, and C. Kasbergen. Influence
of Temperature on TirePavement Friction: Analyses. In Transporta
tion Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board,
No. 2369, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies,
Washington, D.C., 2013, pp. 114124.
2. Anupam, K., S.K. Srirangam, A. Scarpas, C. Kasbergen, and M. Kane.
Study of Cornering Maneuvers of a Pneumatic Tire on Asphalt Pavement
Surfaces Using the Finite Element Method. In Transportation Research
Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2457, Trans-
portation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C.,
2014, pp. 129139.
3. Schuring, D.J. The Rolling Loss of Pneumatic Tires. Rubber Chemistry
and Technology, Vol. 53, No. 3, 1980, pp. 600727.
90
4. Schuring, D.J. A New Look at the Definition of Tire Rolling Loss. Proc.,
SAE Conference, 1977.
5. Clark, J.D., and D.J. Schuring. Load, Speed and Inflation Pressure
Effects on Rolling Loss Distribution in Automobile Tires. Tire Science
and Technology, Vol. 16, No. 2, 1988, pp. 7895.
6. Schuring, D.J., and S. Futamura. Rolling Loss of Pneumatic Highway
Tires in the Eighties. Rubber Chemistry and Technology, Vol. 62, No. 3,
1990, pp. 315367.
7. Ullidtz, P., B. Schmidt, B. Jensen, and O. Nielsen. Energy Reduction
Through Improved Road Pavement Characteristics. Proc., 16th World
Meeting of the International Road Federation, Lisbon, Portugal, 2010.
8. Tielking, J.T., and R.A. Schapery. Energy Loss in an Analytical
Membrane Tire Model. Tire Science and Technology, Vol. 5, No. 3,
1977, pp. 136151.
9. Browne, A.L., D. Wicker, and D.J. Segalman. A General Model for
Power Loss in Pneumatic Tires. GMR-4005. General Motors Research
Laboratories, 1980.
10. Padovan, J. Finite Element Analysis of Steady and Transiently Moving/
Rolling Viscoelastic Structure. I. Theory. Computers and Structures,
Vol. 27, 1987, pp. 249257.
11. Yavari, B., W.W. Tworzydlo, and J.M. Bass. A Thermomechanical
Model to Predict the Temperature Distribution of Steady State Rolling
Tires. Tire Science and Technology, Vol. 21, 1993, pp. 163178.
12. Le Tallec, P., and C. Rahier. Numerical Models of Steady State Roll-
ing for Nonlinear Viscoelastic Structures in Finite Deformations. Inter
national Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, Vol. 37, 1994,
pp. 11591186.
Transportation Research Record 2525
13. Sarkar, K., Y.D. Kwon, and D.C. Prevorsek. A New Approach for the
Thermomechanical Analysis of Tires by the Finite Element Method.
Tire Science and Technology, Vol. 15, 1987, pp. 261275.
14. Luchini, J.R., J.M. Peters, and R.H. Arthur. Tire Rolling Loss Computa-
tion with the Finite Element Method. Tire Science Technology, Vol. 22,
1994, pp. 206222.
15. Ebbott, T.G., R.L. Hohman, J.P. Jeusette, and V. Kerchman. Tire Tempera-
ture and Rolling Resistance Prediction with Finite Element Analysis. Tire
Science Technology, Vol. 27, 1999, pp. 221.
16. Wei, Y.T., Z.H. Tian, and X.W. Du. A Finite Element Model for the Roll-
ing Loss Prediction and Fracture Analysis of Radial Tires. Tire Science
and Technology, Vol. 27, 1999, pp. 250276.
17. Shida, Z., M. Koishi, T. Kogure, and K. Kabe. A Rolling Resistance Simu-
lation of Tires Using Static Finite Element Analysis. Tire Science and
Technology, Vol. 27, No. 2, 1999, pp. 84105.
18. International PIARC Experiments to Compare and Harmonize Texture
and Skid Resistance Measurements. Permanent International Association
of Road CongressesWorld Road Association, Paris, 1995.
19. Srirangam, S.K., K. Anupam, A. Scarpas, and A. Kosters. Influence of
Temperature on Tire-Pavement Friction-I: Laboratory Tests and Finite
Element Modeling. Presented at 92nd Annual Meeting of the Transpor-
tation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2013.
20. ABAQUS Users Manual. Version 6.13. Dassault Systemes, Vlizy-
Villacoublay, France, 2013.
The Standing Committee on Surface PropertiesVehicle Interaction peer-reviewed
this paper.